info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Evolutionary Change Vs. Detect and Repair Mechanism
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Hagar
Feb 12, 2016, 1:05:13 AM2/12/16
to
On 2/11/2016 3:25 PM, Wm. Esque wrote:
>
> Darwinian evolution is predicated upon the concept of mutation and
> natural selection. When a mutation occurs a DNA gene is damaged or
> changed in such a way as to alter the genetic message carried by the
> gene. A mutagen is an agent such as UV rays, free radicals or
> carcinogenic substances that can cause a permanent change in the
> physical composition of a DNA gene resulting in a change of genetic
> message from the original.
>
> Natural Selection is a process in nature in which organisms possessing
> certain genotypic characteristics that make them better adjusted to
> their environment tend to survive, reproduce, increase in number or
> frequency, and therefore, are able to transmit and perpetuate their
> essential genotypic qualities to succeeding generations.
>
> It is by transmitting beneficial, heritable traits that increase an
> organism’s chances of survival and reproduction which are favored over
> those with less beneficial traits. This is the process that results in
> the evolution of organism.
>
> However, a "toolbox" has been discovered in each gene that detects
> and repairs mutations and alterations. It is when these repair
> mechanisms breaks down that cancer develops. It was believed
> that mutations are rare and that the deleterious mutations are
> weeded out by natural selection while beneficial mutations
> are passed on to succeeding generations.
>
> "Each day our DNA is damaged by UV radiation, free radicals and other
> carcinogenic substances, but even without such external attacks, a DNA
> molecule is inherently unstable. Thousands of spontaneous changes to a
> cell’s genome occur on a daily basis. Furthermore, defects can also
> arise when DNA is copied during cell division, a process that occurs
> several million times every day in the human body. The reason our
> genetic material does not disintegrate into complete chemical chaos is
> that a host of molecular systems continuously monitor and repair DNA."
>
> www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2015/press.html
>
> One would think that the genetic toolkit with it's detect and repair
> genetic repair machinery is at odds with mutations as a major factor
> in the evolution of species. The question arises as to how such
> a toolkit could arise through natural means. And why, considering
> that this should tend to be a restraining effect on evolutionary
> change. Of course one could say it's the result of evolution
> or invent some just-so-stories of how it could happen.
>
How else could it happen? It isn't necessary to have all the answers
before accepting the fact that this toolkit is the product of evolution.
>
> The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2015 awards three pioneering scientists who
> have mapped how several of these repair systems function at a detailed
> molecular level."
>
> The three Nobel Prize winners are Thomas
> Lindahl, Paul Modrich and Aziz Sancar.
>
> see:
>
> www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2015/advanced-chemistryprize2015.pdf
>
>
> Darwinian evolution is predicated upon the concept of mutation and
> natural selection. When a mutation occurs a DNA gene is damaged or
> changed in such a way as to alter the genetic message carried by the
> gene. A mutagen is an agent such as UV rays, free radicals or
> carcinogenic substances that can cause a permanent change in the
> physical composition of a DNA gene resulting in a change of genetic
> message from the original.
>
> Natural Selection is a process in nature in which organisms possessing
> certain genotypic characteristics that make them better adjusted to
> their environment tend to survive, reproduce, increase in number or
> frequency, and therefore, are able to transmit and perpetuate their
> essential genotypic qualities to succeeding generations.
>
> It is by transmitting beneficial, heritable traits that increase an
> organism’s chances of survival and reproduction which are favored over
> those with less beneficial traits. This is the process that results in
> the evolution of organism.
>
> However, a "toolbox" has been discovered in each gene that detects
> and repairs mutations and alterations. It is when these repair
> mechanisms breaks down that cancer develops. It was believed
> that mutations are rare and that the deleterious mutations are
> weeded out by natural selection while beneficial mutations
> are passed on to succeeding generations.
>
> "Each day our DNA is damaged by UV radiation, free radicals and other
> carcinogenic substances, but even without such external attacks, a DNA
> molecule is inherently unstable. Thousands of spontaneous changes to a
> cell’s genome occur on a daily basis. Furthermore, defects can also
> arise when DNA is copied during cell division, a process that occurs
> several million times every day in the human body. The reason our
> genetic material does not disintegrate into complete chemical chaos is
> that a host of molecular systems continuously monitor and repair DNA."
>
> www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2015/press.html
>
> One would think that the genetic toolkit with it's detect and repair
> genetic repair machinery is at odds with mutations as a major factor
> in the evolution of species. The question arises as to how such
> a toolkit could arise through natural means. And why, considering
> that this should tend to be a restraining effect on evolutionary
> change. Of course one could say it's the result of evolution
> or invent some just-so-stories of how it could happen.
>
How else could it happen? It isn't necessary to have all the answers
before accepting the fact that this toolkit is the product of evolution.
>
> The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2015 awards three pioneering scientists who
> have mapped how several of these repair systems function at a detailed
> molecular level."
>
> The three Nobel Prize winners are Thomas
> Lindahl, Paul Modrich and Aziz Sancar.
>
> see:
>
> www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2015/advanced-chemistryprize2015.pdf
>
Christopher A. Lee
Feb 12, 2016, 1:43:11 AM2/12/16
to
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 01:05:45 -0500, Hagar <Ha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>How else could it happen? It isn't necessary to have all the answers
>before accepting the fact that this toolkit is the product of evolution.
The religiously motivated evolution deniers refuse to "allow"
>How else could it happen? It isn't necessary to have all the answers
>before accepting the fact that this toolkit is the product of evolution.
explanations within the well understood background they deny, and
demand they be made in total isolation from the rest of the
objectively researched knowledge base.
They seem to "think" evolution is part of a world wide conspiracy to
deceive by governments, scientists and publishers - otherwise why
would so many people all say the same thing?
What the heck is alt.paranet.skeptic?
Andrew
Feb 12, 2016, 7:01:00 AM2/12/16
to
"Hagar" wrote in message news:%Bevy.885807$a_7.2...@fx43.am4...
In order to be intellectually honest you need
to [no must] consider >every< option.
> It isn't necessary to have all the answers before
> accepting the fact that this toolkit is the product
> of evolution.
So you honestly think it is a 'fact' that evolution
~created a mechanism~ that prevents evolution.
And you don't understand that such premise is
fundamentally "foolish".
Is that correct?
to [no must] consider >every< option.
> It isn't necessary to have all the answers before
> accepting the fact that this toolkit is the product
> of evolution.
~created a mechanism~ that prevents evolution.
And you don't understand that such premise is
fundamentally "foolish".
Is that correct?
Andrew
Feb 12, 2016, 7:01:35 AM2/12/16
to
"Cloud Hobbit" wrote in message news:4b1a39cb-900f-48ad...@googlegroups.com...
> One of the marvelous things about science is that is always ready to accept new information.
>
> Congratulations to the 3 gentlemen for advancing our knowledge while opening up (as is
> always the case with new discoveries) a whole new batch of questions.
The problem is, that this "new information" always points us to Creation
And the fact that we have a most awesome and wonderful Creator, GOD.
Therefore let us learn of Him and prepare to meet Him in peace.
>
> Congratulations to the 3 gentlemen for advancing our knowledge while opening up (as is
> always the case with new discoveries) a whole new batch of questions.
The problem is, that this "new information" always points us to Creation
And the fact that we have a most awesome and wonderful Creator, GOD.
Therefore let us learn of Him and prepare to meet Him in peace.
John Hagar PhD
Feb 12, 2016, 11:30:27 AM2/12/16
to
On 2/12/2016 1:43 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 01:05:45 -0500, Hagar <Ha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How else could it happen? It isn't necessary to have all the answers
>> before accepting the fact that this toolkit is the product of evolution.
>
> The religiously motivated evolution deniers refuse to "allow"
> explanations within the well understood background they deny, and
> demand they be made in total isolation from the rest of the
> objectively researched knowledge base.
>
Science is about discovery and with discovery there are new questions
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 01:05:45 -0500, Hagar <Ha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How else could it happen? It isn't necessary to have all the answers
>> before accepting the fact that this toolkit is the product of evolution.
>
> The religiously motivated evolution deniers refuse to "allow"
> explanations within the well understood background they deny, and
> demand they be made in total isolation from the rest of the
> objectively researched knowledge base.
>
and new research.
>
> They seem to "think" evolution is part of a world wide conspiracy to
> deceive by governments, scientists and publishers - otherwise why
> would so many people all say the same thing?
>
> What the heck is alt.paranet.skeptic?
>
It's pseudoscience.
> They seem to "think" evolution is part of a world wide conspiracy to
> deceive by governments, scientists and publishers - otherwise why
> would so many people all say the same thing?
>
> What the heck is alt.paranet.skeptic?
>
John Hagar PhD
Feb 12, 2016, 11:45:52 AM2/12/16
to
one example of a breakdown of the mechanism.
>
> And you don't understand that such premise is
> fundamentally "foolish".
>
Not actually true. Since the DNA is unstable and
> And you don't understand that such premise is
> fundamentally "foolish".
>
subject to the ravages of UV, carcinogens and degradation
a detect and repair mechanism must have gradually
arose and natural selection weeded out organisms with less
DNA stability. This had to begin early in the history
of life and gradually improve over time as organisms
became increasingly complex.
>
> Is that correct?
>
On its face, but that's illusory.
0 new messages